But to what end development? How much development is enough to convince a leader that his people have had enough state guidance? Although China, Indonesia and Malaysia have less than fully developed economies, Singapore has 7%-8% GDP growth per year, a per capita GDP of $22,900, inflation at 1.7% and an unemployment rate of 2.6%. What is Singapore's excuse for its heavy-handed style of government? Is it not yet developed enough to allow the freedom to criticize the government? If Singapore doesn't yet consider itself developed enough, what hope do Malaysia, Indonesia or China have?
Some Western analysts argue that Asian development is for naught if the people in those nations can't enjoy it. Without the freedom to enjoy money, what good is it? But as another Asian policy analyst points out, freedom without money is India, a nation of 800 million people with relatively liberal legal freedoms, but a per capita GDP of only $1500 with as much as 40% or the nation too poor to receive an adequate diet. The developing nations of East Asia believe that without development, freedom is irrelevant, and without strong state guidance, development will never come. So, in this context, "Asian values" can be taken as a code word for a temporary repression of human rights in favor of economic development.
But further complicating the notion of Asian values is the definition of what it means to be "Asian." Malaysia is comprised of about 60% ethnic Malay and other indigenous peoples 59%, 30% ethnic Chinese, and 10% ethnic Indian. Do all of these peoples, from vastly different religious, ethnic, and financial backgrounds, share the same set of Asian values? The ethnic Chinese population of Malaysia controls a large majority of the nation's business and is thus responsible for the lion's share of economic development. Are the ethnic Chinese "more Asian" than the Malay because they are "better" at economic development? In Indonesia, virtually all business is owned either by the minority ethnic Chinese, or by President Suharto's family. Again, we see the question of different Asian values in different ethnic Asian populations. A more important question is whether Suharto and Alatas consider nepotism to be an Asian value.
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Jason Gottlieb's East Asian Politics topic, please visit the Discussions page.